Beginners and Beyond

School shooting in CT (Read 583 times)

FlippyNoodle

Not a dude

posted: 12/16/2012 at 12:04 PM

The link wouldn't work for me. I'm assuming it is referring to failures in properly diagnosing and treating mental illness. I agree with that and have always thought we do a piss-poor job of it. Which problem is easier to fix in a society where it is every man for himself...personal responsibility is the order of the day, and folks are quick to write mentally ill people off as just lazy or weird?

A similar question was asked in Germany in the 1930s, prior to the disarming of civilians.

The second amendment is not about collecting weapons, it's not about hunting, nor is it about target shooting. It's about securing our freedom. Take away the second amendment and you take away the only tool the people have to keep the government in check. The rest of the bill of rights will tumble like dominos. History repeats itself, as the lessons of past societies are seemingly forgotten.

no, that's not the problem The crazy will always be among us. And for that matter within us.

The real problem is people who have assault weapons in their houses Why the @#(! should anyone have or need a goddamned assault weapon in their home???

To follow a similar logic:

Why the F would anyone need an SUV? A prius is fine for you.

- SUVs are involved in more deaths than a prius and more dangerous to operate.

Why the F would anyone need a 4,000 sq.ft. house, 1,000 is fine for you.

- larger houses cost more to operate, generally cost more resources to build and operate. Bad for the environment.

Why the F would anyone need 6 pairs of running shoes, 1 pair at a time is fine for you.

- more shoes mean more resources to make and reek of over endulgence - think of those that cant afford any shoes at all.

Why the F would anyone need to be able to benchpress over their body weight, you can only be strong enough to lift your own weight.

- if you are too strong you can overpower me - you are dangerous you might be mentally unstable.

Why the F should anyone be allowed to couple with someone of their same gender - that is immoral and against god.

- if you are gay, you must be a deviant and thus mentally unstable.

Um, no thank you, that is not for you to decide why someone would want or need something. There are plenty of other countries you are more than welcome to live in if you need someone to control your world for you.

This is a horrible tragedy and blaming and banning the tool is not the solution.

I agree that mental illness is a root cause and must be addressed. This is not a black and white issue with easy answers. Time and again we see the combination of mental illness and easy access to weapons - legally or illegally - resulting in tragedy. Both systems are flawed.

On Friday in China, a man attacked 22 school children with a knife. While there were multiple injuries, there were no casualties. In addition to the carnage, Lanza allegedly used the assault weapon to gain access to the interior of the school. The result might have been different were he not so heavily armed.

One of these days is none of these days.

~ H.G. Bohn

MrNamtor

posted: 12/16/2012 at 12:55 PM

The poor treatment of mental illness is definitely part of the problem, but it's hard to argue that an insane person cannot kill more people with an assault rifle than he can without one.

You can point to other problems, and they are certainly there. But you cannot shift the blame entirely away from the existence of assault weapons and the insane gun laws in the US which allow people, mentally ill or otherwise, to legally own weapons of mass destruction.

On Friday in China, a man attacked 22 school children with a knife. While there were multiple injuries, there were no casualties. In addition to the carnage, Lanza allegedly used the assault weapon to gain access to the interior of the school. The result might have been different were he not so heavily armed.

Exactly right. You can attribute an estimated number of deaths and casualties to the existence of a particular "tool". And that is the carnage caused specifically by that tool. Not the person using the tool. The tool itself.

And you can say that number, in this case is 10 or 20 or however many people who would not have been killed if Lanza had just a knife. But whatever you estimate (and it would be an estimate) that number would not be 0.

Um, no thank you, that is not for you to decide why someone would want or need something. There are plenty of other countries you are more than welcome to live in if you need someone to control your world for you.

Yeah, who the hell would be against nut jobs having extreme multiple homicide weaponry in their homes for them to kill children with except some liberal douchebag commie. So true.

The link wouldn't work for me. I'm assuming it is referring to failures in properly diagnosing and treating mental illness. I agree with that and have always thought we do a piss-poor job of it. Which problem is easier to fix in a society where it is every man for himself...personal responsibility is the order of the day, and folks are quick to write mentally ill people off as just lazy or weird?

Flippy, it's so much more than that. It's a mother of a young boy who is so violently mentally ill that there is almost no way that he won't harm somebody or himself in the future. She has so few resources and worries day to day that he is going to kill his siblings and her. She writes that she is the mother of the Columbine shooters, the VA tech shooter, the CO movie theater shooter, the Gabby Gifford shooter. People know that these kids are sick but there is no infrastructure to a) help them and b) protect society from them.

This analogy, (and all the others you mention as well) would only make any sense if :

A) the primary purpose of motor vehicles was to run people over and

B) you chose an SUV over a prius because you could run more people over with it.

The analogies make sense if you removed the blinders.

The argument is not about the tool though that is what you choose to discuss. Ever hear of "Home of the Free, Because of the Brave."

There are more and more strict laws governing items that are more dangerous for a reason. Those laws, already on the books, need to be enforced.

Currently you can not conceive of something you feel strongly about being banned or outlawed. I can guarantee that if the day comes that one of your strong beliefs becomes threatened you will be up in arms about it.

Inconceivable!

Edit to add:http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

All injury deaths

Number of deaths: 177,154

Deaths per 100,000 population: 57.7

Motor vehicle traffic deaths

Number of deaths: 34,485

Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.2

All poisoning deaths

Number of deaths: 41,592

Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.5

All firearm deaths

Number of deaths: 31,347

Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.2

Considering that vehicles primary purpose 'not to kill' they sure are doing a hell of a good job at it.

The argument is not about the tool though that is what you choose to discuss. Ever hear of "Home of the Free, Because of the Brave."

There are more and more strict laws governing items that are more dangerous for a reason. Those laws, already on the books, need to be enforced.

Currently you can not conceive of something you feel strongly about being banned or outlawed. I can guarantee that if the day comes that one of your strong beliefs becomes threatened you will be up in arms about it.

Inconceivable!

Edit to add:http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Number of deaths: 177,154

Deaths per 100,000 population: 57.7

Number of deaths: 34,485

Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.2

Number of deaths: 41,592

Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.5

Number of deaths: 31,347

Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.2

Considering that vehicles primary purpose 'not to kill' they sure are doing a hell of a good job at it.

There are also a lot more cars than there are guns. Given the number of guns in comparison to the number of motor vehicles and the relatively small difference in deaths by each method, I would have to say that guns are pretty damned dangerous. Furthermore, criminals have to come by their illegally obtained weapons somehow. Could it be from the theft of legally manufactured and sold firearms? My dad is a card-carrying member of the NRA and even HE has had guns stolen from his home. They were eventually recovered, but they could have easily been used in a violent crime before then. Fewer guns in the population = fewer deaths by guns. The same argument could be made for cars, but that is really comparing apples to oranges. Cars have a purpose other than to cause death. Guns do not. And please, the "feel free to move elsewhere" argument is rude and uncalled for. People are allowed to express opinions.

Flippy, it's so much more than that. It's a mother of a young boy who is so violently mentally ill that there is almost no way that he won't harm somebody or himself in the future. She has so few resources and worries day to day that he is going to kill his siblings and her. She writes that she is the mother of the Columbine shooters, the VA tech shooter, the CO movie theater shooter, the Gabby Gifford shooter. People know that these kids are sick but there is no infrastructure to a) help them and b) protect society from them.

Australia had similar issues with mass massacre, and since the enactment of stricter gun laws in 1996, has seen a dramatic decrease in gun deaths, and no mass murders. Similar results seen in Japan. It's not rocket science - less guns, fewer gun deaths.

As far as the driving/cars analogy, the strengthening of laws and rules regarding driver safety has resulted in a pretty significant decrease in car deaths. We're not talking avoiding all gun deaths, we're talking about improving the situation from where we are.

Another thing to note is that most people don't want to take all guns away. Just the most dangerous weapons, and then to put a process in place so that it is less easy to get guns/keep guns out of the wrong hands. Columbine, Aurora, CT, Virginia Tech - guns were EASY for these kids to get, and in many of the cases, they were legally purchased by mentally ill people. We can do better.

It's a compromise. No solution is going to involve taking everyone's guns away and no solution involves no gun law changes.

happylily

posted: 12/16/2012 at 3:32 PM

Regarding the gun laws, we have them in Canada as well, maybe similar to what Australia has... Mostly, for me, it's the storage laws which matter a lot. You cannot keep a weapon assembled and ready to be used in your home. It has to be in parts, stored in different locked places. It would be almost (but not enterely) impossible to use a gun to defend yourself against an intruder. My SO owns guns, he's a member of our provincial shooting association and participates in competitions. My son has Asperger. He will soon be 15. Although he has never displayed any violent behavior, I must admit that I do not always know what he's thinking about or what his feelings truly are. That is the nature of an Aspie child. He's having a tough time at school, sometimes he is bullied. I would be a completely crazy and irresponsible mother if I didn't respect the laws of my country regarding guns. I'm glad we have them here. (SO sometimes gets irritated with them, but he agrees with the fundamental reason behind them).

PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013

Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013

18 marathons, 18 BQs since 2010

happylily

posted: 12/16/2012 at 5:14 PM

Strange that I mentioned my son... I just finished reading that Adam Lanza had Asperger's syndrome... I looked it up, because the way they described him in high school in some reports was very similar to the way my son is. This is not evil, I'm sorry. This is mental illness...